How to get an equation from a “ball is thrown” word problem?












0












$begingroup$


"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?



It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:47












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:53










  • $begingroup$
    Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:57










  • $begingroup$
    @RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:59












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:08
















0












$begingroup$


"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?



It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:47












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:53










  • $begingroup$
    Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:57










  • $begingroup$
    @RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:59












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:08














0












0








0





$begingroup$


"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?



It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




"A ball is thrown upward from the roof of a building 60m tall. The ball reaches a height of 80m above the ground after 2 s and hits the ground 6 s after being thrown." How do I determine the equation without using physics(constants related to physics) ideas?



It should be in the form y= ax^2+ bx + c, right? I got 60 for the y-intercept so y= ax^2+ bx + 60 The ball had the height of 80 meters at 2 seconds. It dropped to the ground in 4 seconds. So 80/4=b b=20? I found a and got -5x^2 + 20x + 60 but do my steps show I understand the problem?







functions word-problem






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Oct 1 '16 at 3:16







Hamze

















asked Oct 1 '16 at 2:44









HamzeHamze

195




195








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:47












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:53










  • $begingroup$
    Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:57










  • $begingroup$
    @RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:59












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:08














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:47












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:53










  • $begingroup$
    Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:57










  • $begingroup$
    @RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
    $endgroup$
    – Mark Viola
    Oct 1 '16 at 2:59












  • $begingroup$
    @Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:08








1




1




$begingroup$
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
$endgroup$
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47






$begingroup$
How can one answer a physics question without using physics? And what is the question?
$endgroup$
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:47














$begingroup$
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53




$begingroup$
@Dr.MV: when there is too much information supplied, so there is enough to measure $g$. We still need the assumption that $g$ is constant.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:53












$begingroup$
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57




$begingroup$
Please define your variables and show more steps. You appear to start with $x$ for time in seconds, but at the end $t$ appears. How did you get to $80/4=b?$ There is also a typo of $6$ for $60$ in the $y$ intercept. I suspect you understand the problem and $a$ is not the canonical $9.81$, but you haven't shown enough steps to show you understand it.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 2:57












$begingroup$
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
$endgroup$
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59






$begingroup$
@RossMillikan Ross, what is the question that the OP is trying to answer? And how does one answer a physics question without physics? That is, what defined the trajectory (path) of the object.
$endgroup$
– Mark Viola
Oct 1 '16 at 2:59














$begingroup$
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08




$begingroup$
@Dr.MV: once you accept the trajectory is quadratic, which to my mind is certainly physics, you can evaluate $a$ and $b$ from the data given. You don't have to accept that $a=-9.81$. I find a different value for $a$
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:08










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0












$begingroup$

Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:23










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:30










  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:35










  • $begingroup$
    You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 4:03











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1948808%2fhow-to-get-an-equation-from-a-ball-is-thrown-word-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0












$begingroup$

Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:23










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:30










  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:35










  • $begingroup$
    You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 4:03
















0












$begingroup$

Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$









  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:23










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:30










  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:35










  • $begingroup$
    You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 4:03














0












0








0





$begingroup$

Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



Physics says two things. First, that the acceleration from gravity is constant, and second, that the acceleration is $-9.81 m/s^2$. You have accepted the first, which results in $y=ax^2+bx+c$ (assuming $x$ is time) but rejected the second. That is fine, you have enough data to evaluate all the constants, as you have three points on the parabola and need three constants, $a,b,c$. As you say, $c=60$ is immediate.







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited Oct 1 '16 at 3:31

























answered Oct 1 '16 at 3:17









Ross MillikanRoss Millikan

293k23197371




293k23197371








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:23










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:30










  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:35










  • $begingroup$
    You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 4:03














  • 1




    $begingroup$
    We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:23










  • $begingroup$
    Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:30










  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
    $endgroup$
    – Hamze
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:35










  • $begingroup$
    You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 3:49






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    Oct 1 '16 at 4:03








1




1




$begingroup$
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
$endgroup$
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23




$begingroup$
We know the equation is y=ax^2+ bx +60. I'd put in the point (2,80) to get 80=a(2)^2 + b(2) +60. Put in the point (6,0) to get 0=a(6)^2 + b(6) +60. Now I have 2 equations with 2 unknowns. I used all 3 points to find all 3 constants by solving for a, and then b. Does this work?
$endgroup$
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:23












$begingroup$
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30




$begingroup$
Yes, that works fine. It turns out $b=20$, but your logic in the question does not justify that.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:30












$begingroup$
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
$endgroup$
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35




$begingroup$
I don't understand why my method works, actually. Did I find the point of intersection? Could I have used any other 2 points?
$endgroup$
– Hamze
Oct 1 '16 at 3:35












$begingroup$
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49




$begingroup$
You were lucky. It turns out $(2,80)$ is the peak, but that is not given. You can write it as $y=-5(x-2)^2+80$. If the ground were at the launch altitude the equation would be $y=-5(x-2)^2$ and it would have hit the ground at $4$ seconds. You would have found $b=20/2=10$ because the peak was $20$ and it hit the ground $2$ seconds later.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 3:49




1




1




$begingroup$
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03




$begingroup$
You have three points on the parabola, if you add in $(0,60)$. That gives you three equations in the three unknowns $a,b,c$ You are just solving the three simultaneous equations to find them. As you noted in the question, the fact that you have a value at $x=0$ makes finding $c$ immediate.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
Oct 1 '16 at 4:03


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1948808%2fhow-to-get-an-equation-from-a-ball-is-thrown-word-problem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Quarter-circle Tiles

build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

Mont Emei